Posted by MikeT23 on 12/17/2012 8:37:00 AM (view original):This interests me in a personal way. I live in a subdivision but there is a protected wetland butted up against my backyard. Lots of wildlife back there. Seems that wild boar have entered the mix. For those who are unfamiliar with them, they're nasty creatures built like a tank. They'll run unless they feel cornered or surprised. Then they'll attack. Can easily kill a dog. I have three and I happen to walk them in the area behind my house twice a day.

I have some guns but I do not have a handgun that will stop a wild boar. As I do live in a neighborhood, I can't strap a high-powered rifle to my back. So I've been researching handguns. Those that know don't seem to think there is a handgun powerful enough to stop a boar with a single shot. So, in my mind, I need something powerful enough to pierce boar skin and has multiple shot capability.

I have no designs on shooting people but I've just laid out a scenario where I need a firearm capable of killing a lot of people in a short time frame. Should this gun be banned?

I think I have read this post 10 times over the last week and laugh every single time.

Yeah, you need a friggin ak47 so you can walk your dog in a wild boar infested swamp.

Maybe you're not familiar with wild boar.

Or, maybe, you hate dogs.

Either way, you don't live my life so I'm pretty sure you have no idea what I need.

Posted by bad_luck on 1/18/2013 6:35:00 PM (view original):No, it's not. The gun is now illegal. Keep it at your own risk.

And that's where we differ. Don't give me a right, because no one has any rights, and then take it away.

What?

Prohibition. Alcohol is legal. Alcohol is not. The govt said "You can drink. No, wait a minute, you cannot."

How'd that work out anyway?

Prohibition was a massive failure.

However, the repeal of prohibition came along with a whole bunch of regulations and oversight over the manufacture, sales, distribution, etc of alcohol which resulted in less availability and consumption of alcohol than there was in the pre-prohibition days.

That's what should happen here. Ban the assault weapons that Joe Citizen doesn't need, and make ownership illegal. Let him still have access to non-assault weapons for hunting, personal protection, etc.

Posted by MikeT23 on 12/17/2012 8:37:00 AM (view original):This interests me in a personal way. I live in a subdivision but there is a protected wetland butted up against my backyard. Lots of wildlife back there. Seems that wild boar have entered the mix. For those who are unfamiliar with them, they're nasty creatures built like a tank. They'll run unless they feel cornered or surprised. Then they'll attack. Can easily kill a dog. I have three and I happen to walk them in the area behind my house twice a day.

I have some guns but I do not have a handgun that will stop a wild boar. As I do live in a neighborhood, I can't strap a high-powered rifle to my back. So I've been researching handguns. Those that know don't seem to think there is a handgun powerful enough to stop a boar with a single shot. So, in my mind, I need something powerful enough to pierce boar skin and has multiple shot capability.

I have no designs on shooting people but I've just laid out a scenario where I need a firearm capable of killing a lot of people in a short time frame. Should this gun be banned?

I think I have read this post 10 times over the last week and laugh every single time.

Yeah, you need a friggin ak47 so you can walk your dog in a wild boar infested swamp.

Maybe you're not familiar with wild boar.

Or, maybe, you hate dogs.

Either way, you don't live my life so I'm pretty sure you have no idea what I need.

Dumbass.

Or maybe I would choose to walk my cockapoo on the street as opposed to your "feral boar" infested swamp.

This still cracks me up.

"I need an assault weapon to walk my dogs safely". Do you believe the drivel you post?

What if someone from the government said "you only need freedom of sppech on odd days. You dont need to complain to the Government EVERY day.
You dont need to have ALL these religions. Lets narrow down to a few good ones and everybody can pick one.

I think the government needs to show a REALLY good reason to limit a constitutional freedom.

What if someone from the government said "you only need freedom of sppech on odd days. You dont need to complain to the Government EVERY day.
You dont need to have ALL these religions. Lets narrow down to a few good ones and everybody can pick one.

I think the government needs to show a REALLY good reason to limit a constitutional freedom.

Posted by MikeT23 on 12/17/2012 8:37:00 AM (view original):This interests me in a personal way. I live in a subdivision but there is a protected wetland butted up against my backyard. Lots of wildlife back there. Seems that wild boar have entered the mix. For those who are unfamiliar with them, they're nasty creatures built like a tank. They'll run unless they feel cornered or surprised. Then they'll attack. Can easily kill a dog. I have three and I happen to walk them in the area behind my house twice a day.

I have some guns but I do not have a handgun that will stop a wild boar. As I do live in a neighborhood, I can't strap a high-powered rifle to my back. So I've been researching handguns. Those that know don't seem to think there is a handgun powerful enough to stop a boar with a single shot. So, in my mind, I need something powerful enough to pierce boar skin and has multiple shot capability.

I have no designs on shooting people but I've just laid out a scenario where I need a firearm capable of killing a lot of people in a short time frame. Should this gun be banned?

I think I have read this post 10 times over the last week and laugh every single time.

Yeah, you need a friggin ak47 so you can walk your dog in a wild boar infested swamp.

Maybe you're not familiar with wild boar.

Or, maybe, you hate dogs.

Either way, you don't live my life so I'm pretty sure you have no idea what I need.

Dumbass.

Or maybe I would choose to walk my cockapoo on the street as opposed to your "feral boar" infested swamp.

This still cracks me up.

"I need an assault weapon to walk my dogs safely". Do you believe the drivel you post?

Did you really read the post? "As I do live in a neighborhood, I can't strap a high-powered rifle to my back. So I've been researching handguns."

I don't care where you walk your cockapoo. Doesn't mean everyone has to follow your path.

Posted by bad_luck on 1/18/2013 6:35:00 PM (view original):No, it's not. The gun is now illegal. Keep it at your own risk.

And that's where we differ. Don't give me a right, because no one has any rights, and then take it away.

What?

Prohibition. Alcohol is legal. Alcohol is not. The govt said "You can drink. No, wait a minute, you cannot."

How'd that work out anyway?

Prohibition was a massive failure.

However, the repeal of prohibition came along with a whole bunch of regulations and oversight over the manufacture, sales, distribution, etc of alcohol which resulted in less availability and consumption of alcohol than there was in the pre-prohibition days.

That's what should happen here. Ban the assault weapons that Joe Citizen doesn't need, and make ownership illegal. Let him still have access to non-assault weapons for hunting, personal protection, etc.

I think they are addressing something about clip capacities. As when an assailant is changing clips that;s a few seconds an armed guard or police officer can gain an advantage on the guy.

I don't see the slippery slope here.

I may be naive, but I feel there is no correlation between HCAW and typical hand guns.
Handguns serve a legitimate purpose, whereas HCAW do not.

I am sure if/when legislation is passed, many on the left will try to push even harder for more gun control, figuring the ball is already rolling, but I don't think they will have much success.

I agree that some are over-reacting, or using Sandy Hook as a tool to further their agenda, or both.
But there are many others of us who are not anti-gun, but also see a need for changes in the way the system currently operates.

I believe the clip limit is going to be 7. 14 bullets with 2 guns. Dead teacher, dead teacher's aide, 12 dead children before a clip change is necessary. Takes about 1 second to pull a trigger. All done in less than 20 seconds.

That is your slippery slope.

What needs to be addressed, rather than a knee-jerk reaction of banning guns, is the security of schools. Metal doors lock and no one can get in without approval. Doesn't matter what kind of gun you have if you can't get in.